Council considers change to city's smoking ordinance
Council considers change to city's smoking ordinance
By Chris Norwood
12-19-2007
TALLADEGA — The City Council essentially held an open forum Monday night to discuss possible revisions to a ban on smoking in nearly all public buildings in the city passed by the previous administration. No action was taken during the meeting, however.
Owners of several restaurants and bars in the city complained their smoking customers were moving on to other establishments outside the city limits, where the ban cannot be enforced, and asked for the ban to be made optional for such businesses. Council President Dr. Horace Patterson appointed Councilmen Donnie Mille and Eddie Tucker to study the issue and report back Monday night.
“I was willing to compromise, even though I felt it was wrong, but I was willing to try and make everybody happy. But Miller just says let the businesses decide for themselves. I would be willing to restrict it to bars after 10 or 11 p.m.,” Tucker said.
At least one of the business owners present said she is not open that late.
“I don’t think we’re in a position to change the ordinance,” Tucker said. “It’s like you only want to let people decide for themselves, and I think we shouldn’t let them do that. Besides, research says that second hand smoke is worse for people with asthma and emphysema. …”
”I don’t smoke myself, but I am a business owner,” Miller said. “We’re a small town. We don’t have any chain restaurants here, the sit-down restaurants we do have are locally owned. Taking away part of someone’s business hurts. Nobody’s cutting our costs for power or business licenses or health department licenses. No one gets dragged into a bar here. No one passes through Talladega to get something to eat. People here go to specific restaurants. At Fincher’s and Stampede, no smoking signs are already up, and their patrons know that. I don’t have a sit-down restaurant anymore, but if I did, I’d have one up, too. But all we’re doing is sending business to the restaurants in the county and hurting the ones in the city.”
Tucker said making the ban optional would essentially gut the ordinance. Miller said his proposal would apply only to sit-down restaurants.
Councilman Dr. Jimmy Davis said he was also staunchly opposed to smoking but agreed with Miller’s position. Councilman Dr. Lance Grissett said he was still undecided, since he had had close family members to die of lung cancer.
“But I’m still wrestling with that, with what’s best for the city,” he said.
The floor was then opened to the public. The majority spoke in favor of Miller’s proposal.
“I’m a non-smoker, but the ban hurts business, so I say turn it back over to the owners,” one resident said.
Yet another speaker favoring the repeal said it would affect only about five local establishments, leaving at least 40 other places in town for non-smokers to patronize.
“We’ll separate ourselves as we have for years,” he said. “And if you want to ban smoking, why don’t you stop collecting a tax on it, too,” he said.
Another said she had previously worked as a bar tender, but since the smoking ban, bar traffic had dwindled to virtually nothing. “If you don’t want people to smoke, tell the grocery and convenience store owners to quit selling cigarettes,” she said.
Someone characterizing himself as an ex-smoker said, “I chose to quit, the city didn’t tell me to. I guess next you’ll be telling me I have to go on a diet. If 21 percent of people smoke, then give them the chance to make up their mind to quit, too. This foolishness is just silly.”
Another audience member, who said she was not prepared to speak publicly but felt compelled to, said, “I am an advocate for non-smoking, but I say listen to the business owners. It’s my choice not to smoke, and it’s my choice not to visit businesses that allow smoking, as is my right. Everybody goes to Wal-Mart, everybody goes to the courthouse, everyone comes here to City Hall, and you shouldn’t be allowed to smoke in those places. I don’t have to go to a bar.”
The last speaker on behalf of the change said she was 76 years old, raised on a tobacco farm and worked in bars all her life, and was currently in better physical condition than most of her other family members.
Only two speakers came out in favor of the status quo. The first, representing FIRST Family Services, did not speak but did present the council with a fact sheet and letters from sixth-graders.
The second, a social worker with the county health department, said, “Government always tells us what to do. Smoke endangers people. I have asthma, and have had attacks triggered by cigarettes. I just buried an uncle with larynx cancer. And what about the kids? They have no choice. There is no safe amount of second hand smoke.”
http://www.dailyhome.com/news/2007/dh-talladega-1219-cnorwood-7l18v4227.htm
By Chris Norwood
12-19-2007
TALLADEGA — The City Council essentially held an open forum Monday night to discuss possible revisions to a ban on smoking in nearly all public buildings in the city passed by the previous administration. No action was taken during the meeting, however.
Owners of several restaurants and bars in the city complained their smoking customers were moving on to other establishments outside the city limits, where the ban cannot be enforced, and asked for the ban to be made optional for such businesses. Council President Dr. Horace Patterson appointed Councilmen Donnie Mille and Eddie Tucker to study the issue and report back Monday night.
“I was willing to compromise, even though I felt it was wrong, but I was willing to try and make everybody happy. But Miller just says let the businesses decide for themselves. I would be willing to restrict it to bars after 10 or 11 p.m.,” Tucker said.
At least one of the business owners present said she is not open that late.
“I don’t think we’re in a position to change the ordinance,” Tucker said. “It’s like you only want to let people decide for themselves, and I think we shouldn’t let them do that. Besides, research says that second hand smoke is worse for people with asthma and emphysema. …”
”I don’t smoke myself, but I am a business owner,” Miller said. “We’re a small town. We don’t have any chain restaurants here, the sit-down restaurants we do have are locally owned. Taking away part of someone’s business hurts. Nobody’s cutting our costs for power or business licenses or health department licenses. No one gets dragged into a bar here. No one passes through Talladega to get something to eat. People here go to specific restaurants. At Fincher’s and Stampede, no smoking signs are already up, and their patrons know that. I don’t have a sit-down restaurant anymore, but if I did, I’d have one up, too. But all we’re doing is sending business to the restaurants in the county and hurting the ones in the city.”
Tucker said making the ban optional would essentially gut the ordinance. Miller said his proposal would apply only to sit-down restaurants.
Councilman Dr. Jimmy Davis said he was also staunchly opposed to smoking but agreed with Miller’s position. Councilman Dr. Lance Grissett said he was still undecided, since he had had close family members to die of lung cancer.
“But I’m still wrestling with that, with what’s best for the city,” he said.
The floor was then opened to the public. The majority spoke in favor of Miller’s proposal.
“I’m a non-smoker, but the ban hurts business, so I say turn it back over to the owners,” one resident said.
Yet another speaker favoring the repeal said it would affect only about five local establishments, leaving at least 40 other places in town for non-smokers to patronize.
“We’ll separate ourselves as we have for years,” he said. “And if you want to ban smoking, why don’t you stop collecting a tax on it, too,” he said.
Another said she had previously worked as a bar tender, but since the smoking ban, bar traffic had dwindled to virtually nothing. “If you don’t want people to smoke, tell the grocery and convenience store owners to quit selling cigarettes,” she said.
Someone characterizing himself as an ex-smoker said, “I chose to quit, the city didn’t tell me to. I guess next you’ll be telling me I have to go on a diet. If 21 percent of people smoke, then give them the chance to make up their mind to quit, too. This foolishness is just silly.”
Another audience member, who said she was not prepared to speak publicly but felt compelled to, said, “I am an advocate for non-smoking, but I say listen to the business owners. It’s my choice not to smoke, and it’s my choice not to visit businesses that allow smoking, as is my right. Everybody goes to Wal-Mart, everybody goes to the courthouse, everyone comes here to City Hall, and you shouldn’t be allowed to smoke in those places. I don’t have to go to a bar.”
The last speaker on behalf of the change said she was 76 years old, raised on a tobacco farm and worked in bars all her life, and was currently in better physical condition than most of her other family members.
Only two speakers came out in favor of the status quo. The first, representing FIRST Family Services, did not speak but did present the council with a fact sheet and letters from sixth-graders.
The second, a social worker with the county health department, said, “Government always tells us what to do. Smoke endangers people. I have asthma, and have had attacks triggered by cigarettes. I just buried an uncle with larynx cancer. And what about the kids? They have no choice. There is no safe amount of second hand smoke.”
http://www.dailyhome.com/news/2007/dh-talladega-1219-cnorwood-7l18v4227.htm
Labels: Council considers change to city's smoking ordinance
posted by coalville auto care at
10:24 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home